Platt Holden (pholden@worldnet.att.net)
Fri, 30 Jan 1998 17:56:06 +0100
Hi Magnus,
Magnus wrote:
> So, we have at least three different kinds of chaos. Let's map them
> to the levels and se what we get.
>
> Freedom from intellectual patterns:
> This would be your kind of chaos, I'd call it inspirational chaos.
>
> Freedom from social patterns, (and above):
> Some kind of revolution maybe, hippies, the french revolution.
>
> Freedom from biological patterns, (and above):
> This is the kind of chaos scientists talk about in chaos theory.
> (Actually, this is not quite true. I believe there are more than
> one discipline here. When talking weather, this is it. But I also
> think that chaos theory is used when describing the intricate
> patterns on i.e. oak leaves.)
>
> Freedom from inorganic patterns, (and above):
> Now, that's my kind of chaos.
> We're talking pre-big-bang-non-existence-chaos-big-time.
Thanks for a great MoQ-based explanation of chaos. You've shown how to use
the MoQ to "map" an abstract concept to different levels with resulting
different meanings. Added to Bo's analysis of the social moral question and
Doug's numerous examples, the Squad now has another classic model of how
to apply the MoQ intellectual tool to specific problems.
I assume your pre-big-bang-non-existence-chaos is pure freedom (DQ without
SQ) which we mortals can never hope to see in our DQ-SQ reality, but can
only have a "dim apprehension of." Do you ascribe beauty to this
non-existent realm as I do? Do you think beauty plays a role in scientific
theories about the pre-big-bang? I read somewhere where the super string
theory has been challenged by some on the grounds that the math involved is
too complex and "inelegant." Your comments?
Platt
-- post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:40 CEST